Tag Info

New answers tagged

2

Some designers says putting lot of call-to-action together is better. Because the user can get their goals more easily and quickly. It's not true. It's not important how many actions as it is how productive those actions are. Because every action or interaction should take the user closer their goal while eliminating. I highly recommend you to read these ...


0

After posting the question, and looking at the tree some more, I realized I can optimize for the type of user persona by shuffling things around. For example, a user that wants to get started right away probably wants a quick Matchmaking option. By removing the "Matchmaking" button, and showing the "Ranked/Unranked" right away, I effectively promote that ...


0

My guess: folders are legacy for desktop applications. The reason is: humans can handle only one level of hierarchy in an instinctive way. This was shown over-and-over again on various cognitive tests. Monocline grouping, as termed by Alan Cooper in About Face, while referring Donald Norman, seems to be the natural way of organizing things. Abilities of ...


4

Unless there are additional levels of expansion within what you show here, I don't think this qualifies as a tree menu. It's just a collapsible list. If the client/employer thought it looked too tree-menu-like, minor visual changes could possibly improve that without actually impacting the underlying interaction or code. Make the expand/collapse arrows right ...


7

I'd say the design of a tree menu is much older than 10 years. Windows 3.1 had a tree structure as part of the UI in it's File Manager. Now, the fact that a design is 10 year old is no argument. Rolex is successful at selling watches of which the design is more than 50 years old and I don't hear anyone saying they don't understand user's needs. About ...


3

Ideally you could provide me exactly what I need without any input. This is, of course, impossible to do with various types of users all wanting different things. The reality is some businesses just have a lot of content that needs to be accessed at different times by different people so here are some things to keep in mind as you redesign your portal ...


0

While I have no idea of what content you want to display, you could try Google Material's cards , adding your heading as a card, then supplemental actions if needed, and a list of contents for that particular card. Since cards allows for heterogeneous content, this could be very suitable to your specific needs, not to mention these are very nice elements ...


1

I was confronted with this challenge recently as well. There is a desire to have a "cool" portal page with lots of vaguely relevant icons leading to specific functional areas of the app. The trouble is, the whole thing feels forced. And if your app suite (or set of views and activities) gets very deep, the portal has a tendency to be either too shallow or ...


2

The two alternatives you've mentioned: Summary pages Windows-style drop downs An alternative that I've come up with is almost a combination of those two. Instead of an icon-based dashboard, I've come up with a windowed dashboard: Each window could list the various sites as links or buttons, with hierarchical links displayed as nested items: The ...


0

I'd recommend iOS standards unless you really need to break from convention. Standard iOS expectation is that you always have a back / up-level nav in the upper left corner. If you put 2 nav icons side-by-side in the upper left (Hamburger and Back Nav) that makes them both less usable and creates challenges - which is the one on the left most side? Your #2 ...


0

I'd consider this as well, and it seems to be an element that is getting a closer look. Material Design introduces the floating button concept as Android's default, so expect to see more and more actions (eg expand menu) on bottom or safe sides of larger devices. Now, I'll play devil advocate's and recommend you to check the Affordances article by Mads ...



Top 50 recent answers are included